Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 316-330 of 379
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Industry committee  There's no attempt to fix anything within the do-not-call list in this legislation. It's merely to say that at some point in time we almost have this poison pill where we can stop the do-not-call list and replace it with the ECPA. I would say that if the decision to stick with t

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  I'm loath to read into what exactly the full thought process was in terms of making that choice, although I might guess that it is, admittedly, early days. The do-not-call list has only been up for a year, although I think there's enough evidence to suggest that changes are neede

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  No, I was thinking of a legislative review. I do think that is obviously necessary. Reporting requirements to get a sense of how effective this legislation is on a regular basis and what we're doing internationally are the sorts of things I think we ought to be doing, and they su

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  I will admit, it's something I haven't much seen in legislation. I found it was a surprising inclusion in this bill, having worked through 68 pages, to find at the very end provisions that would effectively kill the do-not-call list and replace it with this legislation. My own v

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  With respect to problems, here are two that I think highlight why in fact Bill C-27 does a pretty good job of dealing with these issues. The first problem is on this issue of whether it's opt-in or opt-out. I'm a strong supporter of our move towards an opt-in model here. As I thi

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  I think I'm quoted in that same piece. Another one of the concerns was that someone might want to buy software from a software vendor, and if it was outside of the 18 months, the person they're buying from might report the consumer as a spammer, which I didn't think was a parti

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  Sure, and I think that's absolutely right. Quite frankly, we experienced the concern as a task force ourselves. It was a year-long process. When we started the focus was almost exclusively on spam, and by the end of the 12 months, issues around spyware and phishing had really eme

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  No, and I'm sorry if I wasn't sufficiently clear. I'm supportive of Bill C-27. My concern lies with the potential to water down the legislation. I think it does a pretty good job of striking the balance, and my fear is that some of the concerns, many of which I think are not vali

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  It's a great question. I think in some ways there are already frameworks in place to deal with many of these international issues. Canada has been a participant in them. Even dating back to when we were sitting as a spam task force, groups called the London Action Plan were bring

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  My sense was that the minister recognized it was still early days and that there perhaps have been some growing pains with respect to the do-not-call list. I think it's more serious than that. There are more than six million numbers registered on the do-not-call list. There have

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  Sure. With respect to Australia, respectfully, my reading is different. I have the Australian act in front of me, and it refers to commercial electronic messages in much the same way. I don't see a significant difference on the definitional side. Part 2, subsection 16(1), of

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  That's right.

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  My understanding is that in Utah you had widespread abuse or attempted abuse of that provision. I think it was prisoners who were sending messages and then hoping to use that as an opportunity to file suit. While I recognize that this seems like a concern, the experience we've

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  I know that under “do not call”, educational institutions have fallen under charitable organizations, so they might well fall under the same here.

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist

Industry committee  That's right, but our bill—I'll try to find the specific section—contains an exception for, I believe, registered charities. To my knowledge, just about every single university, for example, that might want to contact an alumnus is a registered charity. I know that's the approach

June 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Prof. Michael Geist